Jump to content
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

The term "defense."


Recommended Posts

Do you think that the term "defense," or even "self-defense," is the terminology of a victim?

If you think about the conotation of the word(s), I can see where this perception could come from.

As many of you may have seen, I am a proponent of the pre-emptive strike. Many would not associate the pre-emptive strike with the terminology of self-defense; many would consider it an attack, an initiative.

I think that attacking in the initiative, if you can sense the threat, is the best option, when the time comes. If self-defense is deemed reactionary, then do you think the term is also related to the term "victim?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

IMHO,

Defending is not when I get punched and then attack- that is not self-defense; that is revenge.

Defending is when I get punched at then attack. When I defend myself I am taking a preventative measure against becoming a victim.

Although, I never really thought of it offense/defense, I think of it as defense/punishment, because I don't attack people unless they attack me... disliking jail and such... :P

You suck-train harder.......................Don't block with your face


A good traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.

-Lao Tzu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a former member of the Department of Defense, I see no problem with the terminology. No victim mindset there!

If you think only of hitting, springing, striking or touching the enemy, you will not be able actually to cut him. You must thoroughly research this. - Musashi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the message to send out to people who want to defend themselves, is to not be afraid to strike pre-emptively if they feel it is neccessary. Also, they need to feel comfortable that the strike will be effective, if not, then they need to train more to develop an effective strike.

Especially if they feel that thier blocking/parrying and reaction skills are not up to defending against a spontaneous attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the message to send out to people who want to defend themselves, is to not be afraid to strike pre-emptively if they feel it is neccessary. Also, they need to feel comfortable that the strike will be effective, if not, then they need to train more to develop an effective strike.

Especially if they feel that thier blocking/parrying and reaction skills are not up to defending against a spontaneous attack.

I agree with you here. It is one thing to say you will "block and counter," when in actuality, you may not have the chance to see the attack coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO,

Defending is not when I get punched and then attack- that is not self-defense; that is revenge.

Defending is when I get punched at then attack. When I defend myself I am taking a preventative measure against becoming a victim.

Although, I never really thought of it offense/defense, I think of it as defense/punishment, because I don't attack people unless they attack me... disliking jail and such... :P

Your description makes it sound as if punching after being punched is a bad thing. When you state that it is revenge, it sounds, I don't know, like you don't like it, or agree with it. I am just curious if that is what you feel. Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think of each contact from the attacker as a separate event, so yes, I'll punch after they hit me, but it is to prevent the next strike, not in retaliation of the previous.

You suck-train harder.......................Don't block with your face


A good traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.

-Lao Tzu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pre-emptive striking is still self defence. Defence and victim are not mutually exclusive. The thing to remember is what constitutes self defence according to the law, is more important than any other definition you want to give it. If you don't take the legal definition into account, then you aren't looking at the question of self defence and are just arguing over the semantics of the terms.

traditional chinese saying:

speak much, wrong much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bushido_man96,

While defending oneself from an attack does imply that the person is a victim (regardless of whether the perps succeed or not) I don't think the use of the term conditions one to feel like a victim. Additionally, I think with frequent and long term training, defense against an attack is not so much "reactionary" as "actionary." This may be splitting hairs, but it is my belief that "reaction" requires a certain amount of thought, which is what I train to remove. As Takuan Soho states, in his book The Unfettered Mind , thinking sends one's mind to the abiding place, hampering one's ability to perform efficiently in any situation. Also, I agree with mantis.style, a preemptive attack is still a defensive maneuver, albeit a very aggressive one.

Ed

Ed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...